If you’re active part of the online firearms community you’ve known for some time how biased the media can be in its reporting of gun related stories.

We publish self defense stories using guns here nearly everyday, but rarely do those stories make it outside of some basic online news coverage at the local level. Reporters can’t wait to use the term “assault weapon” when reporting on any gun story, even positive ones. Reporters often leave off the “semi” part of semi-automatic, implying that standard civilian rifles are the same as the rifles used by militaries.

The Washington Time’s Emily Miller (the reporter who covered in great detail the trials and tribulations of gun ownership in Washington, DC) is now blasting the NY Times for their extremely biased gun coverage in one of her recent columns.

Miller points out numerous issues with a front page news story that the Times ran taking gun manufacturers to task. She found that the story used decade old court testimony which was cherry picked and mostly taken out of context.

From her column:

On Tuesday, the above-the-fold headline in the paper blared: “Gun Makers Saw No Role in Curbing Improper Sales.” The story was on the top right side, next to a large photo of a young mother holding her young son at her veteran husband’s grave at Arlington National Cemetery.

Not subtle.

The reporters, Mike McIntire and Michael Luo, cherry-picked court documents from the early 2000s in an attempt to prove that manufacturers do not care about crimes perpetrated by criminals misusing illegally obtained guns.

All the quotes that lead the story by executives from major companies including Glock, Taurus, MKS Supply, Beretta, and Sturm, Ruger were drawn from depositions in lawsuits brought by the Brady Campaign on behalf of big cities against firearms manufacturers to hold them financially liable for gun violence.

It was not revealed until the fourth paragraph of the story that the quotes from firearms manufacturers were over 10 years old.